What more evidence do we need to change our voting system?

[Anna B]

72% turn out is being seen as because this was the public's only chance to vote meaningfully and register their dissatisfaction with the establishment and the status quo.

 

I feel quite proud that the British have shown their feelings in this civilised way rather than resorting to rioting etc as we have seen in the rest of Europe.

 

Since the 2007 crash and austerity the whole of Europe has been a tinder box waiting to explode. Maybe now other countries will see this and work towards getting their own referendum and this will take some of the heat out of the situation.

[Margarita Ma]

72% turn out is being seen as because this was the public's only chance to vote meaningfully and register their dissatisfaction with the establishment and the status quo.

 

I feel quite proud that the British have shown their feelings in this civilised way rather than resorting to rioting etc as we have seen in the rest of Europe.

 

Since the 2007 crash and austerity the whole of Europe has been a tinder box waiting to explode. Maybe now other countries will see this and work towards getting their own referendum and this will take some of the heat out of the situation.

 

I have heard the so called Experts analysis of who and why the votes were cast. I do wonder if any voters have been asked Why they voted the way they did. My vote was influenced after weighing up the pro's and cons of the European system and present condition. The Merkle promise to Turkey of a speeded up entry, and no visa condition. That was my breaking point. Nothing to do with immigration but the imminent danger of ISIS/Daesh arriving on our shores with forged Turkish Documents. Within Three months of Turkey Joining the EU there could be enough Daesh here to form an army. We cannot properly control our borders now The evidence is shown in all the dead people and those needing urgent hospital treatment that we know about. There must be thousands more that we do not know about as well as those with documentation.

 

My vote was certainly not cast to show dissatisfaction with the British establishment. but to hopefully take us out of the danger or at least some of it that Merkle's big mouth has got Europe into. The news is littered with riots and devastation in Migrant camps, showing that some of these people are not genuine refugees.

 

I do believe that politician's are unable to understand the people they are there to represent. They behave in a condescending manner intimating that the majority are not capable of thinking through complex matters and present simplistic views instead of concrete information on which we can base our own opinions. Not many Politicians actually debate in a reasoned fashion. I am infuriated by the herd of braying Donkeys that take their stipend and their very generous living and travel expences from the taxpayer while deriding their ability to make decisions on serious matters

Edited June 25, 2016 by Margarita Ma

[apelike]

I have heard the so called Experts analysis of who and why the votes were cast. i do wonder if any voters have been asked Why they voted the way they did. My vote was influenced after weighing up the pro's and cons of the European system and present condition the Merkle promise to Turkey of a speeded up entry , nothing to do withand no visa condition. That was my breaking point.

 

Well said, and as stated on another thread I also voted out for similar reasons and immigration played no part in that decision.

[Margarita Ma]

I appear to have inadvertently moved some words in my post above and only noticed when the post was quoted. I will amend the post to correct it.

[Anna B]

This country is so proud of its 'traditions' that it has become backward looking and wary of change.

Of course we should update our voting system, and Parliament. They are no longer fit for purpose in their current form. Proportional Representation is the way forward, and no more closed shortlist candidates selected behind closed doors. Labour has gone some of the way towards this.

The Houses of Parliament, which needs £millions spending on them, should be turned into a museum and perhaps used for state occasions, and a proper purpose built building with all the modern facilities be used instead. An elected second house should do away with the Lords.

The Honours system should also be done away with while we're at it.

 

For Heaven's sake, let's move into the 21st Century.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Anna B

[BoroB]

This country is so proud of its 'traditions' that it has become backward looking and wary of change.

Of course we should update our voting system, and Parliament. They are no longer fit for purpose in their current form. Proportional Representation is the way forward, and no more closed shortlist candidates selected behind closed doors. Labour has gone some of the way towards this.

The Houses of Parliament, which needs £millions spending on them, should be turned into a museum and perhaps used for state occasions, and a proper purpose built building with all the modern facilities be used instead. An elected second house should do away with the Lords.

The Honours system should also be done away with while we're at it.

 

For Heaven's sake, let's move into the 21st Century.

 

Perhaps we should also be looking at why so many people do not vote?

 

The 70% plus turnout for the referendum still meant that around 13,000,000 did not vote.

 

A mate told me years ago of a suggestion that a work colleague had made to him - make polling day an additional bank holiday that you got if you actually voted.

 

For those on benefits they would receive an additional payment or lose an element if they chose not to vote.

 

There would be a box to tick on the polling sheet along the lines of 'I not bothered with any of the candidates' so that voter apathy could be measured.

[Justin Smith]

So, voting has ended and already in some areas politicians and the BBC are referring to 80% turnouts in areas that would normally have 30%.

 

Our representatives cannot ignore this. Too many people do not vote as they feel their vote will not count under our present first past the post system.

 

I do not see how our representatives can claim that our current system is democratic anymore, after this turnout.

 

At least this referendum has taught us one thing, we cannot cling on to the first past the post system any longer.

 

I agree absolutely. I would add that the referendum we had before was not for simple PR, it was for some esoteric alternative vote system. My own preferred system would be a smaller number of constituency MPs but with a top up list. The latter possibly coming from those coming second by the closest margin in the constituency votes.

[GLASGOWOODS]

I have heard the so called Experts analysis of who and why the votes were cast. I do wonder if any voters have been asked Why they voted the way they did. My vote was influenced after weighing up the pro's and cons of the European system and present condition. The Merkle promise to Turkey of a speeded up entry, and no visa condition. That was my breaking point. Nothing to do with immigration but the imminent danger of ISIS/Daesh arriving on our shores with forged Turkish Documents. Within Three months of Turkey Joining the EU there could be enough Daesh here to form an army. We cannot properly control our borders now The evidence is shown in all the dead people and those needing urgent hospital treatment that we know about. There must be thousands more that we do not know about as well as those with documentation.

 

My vote was certainly not cast to show dissatisfaction with the British establishment. but to hopefully take us out of the danger or at least some of it that Merkle's big mouth has got Europe into. The news is littered with riots and devastation in Migrant camps, showing that some of these people are not genuine refugees.

 

I do believe that politician's are unable to understand the people they are there to represent. They behave in a condescending manner intimating that the majority are not capable of thinking through complex matters and present simplistic views instead of concrete information on which we can base our own opinions. Not many Politicians actually debate in a reasoned fashion. I am infuriated by the herd of braying Donkeys that take their stipend and their very generous living and travel expences from the taxpayer while deriding their ability to make decisions on serious matters

 

Good post. I voted out for similar.

 

---------- Post added 25-06-2016 at 22:15 ----------

 

Perhaps we should also be looking at why so many people do not vote?

 

The 70% plus turnout for the referendum still meant that around 13,000,000 did not vote.

 

A mate told me years ago of a suggestion that a work colleague had made to him - make polling day an additional bank holiday that you got if you actually voted.

 

For those on benefits they would receive an additional payment or lose an element if they chose not to vote.

 

There would be a box to tick on the polling sheet along the lines of 'I not bothered with any of the candidates' so that voter apathy could be measured.

 

Not a bad idea......

[blake]

at 72% turnout was not high at all. Only 5 points more than at the GE last year, and definitely lower than I thought it might be. And the low turnout in the referendum was a factor in the result. Had the turnout been higher, then REMAIN would probably have won. LEAVE voters were much more motivated to turn out than REMAIN voters were. It was never going to be as high as the 84% that turned out for the Scottish Referendum, but I still thought it might at least be in the late 70s. 72% was not a high turnout for this referendum at all, considering the massive amount of interest it generated. 72% is quite a low turnout really. Certainly not anything special like the turnout for the Scottish referendum was.

 

absolute turnout was quite low but some groups turned out much more to vote in this referendum than they usually do in other elections, and their turnout was high. It was the issue at hand that motivated some voters to turn out more than others, not the different voting system, and you can be sure that many people who never or almost never vote in General Elections did vote in the referendum. People in the lower DE demographic category turned out much more than in this 2016 poll than they did in the 2015 GE last year and they were the demographic most likely to vote LEAVE.

 

to try and make out that what was only a slight increase in turnout in some way means that people want a change in the voting system is nonsensical. Because when there actually was a referendum on changing the voting system in 2011, nobody wanted to know. Only 42% bothered to turn out to vote for that, the most pathetic turnout in UK history, and which showed that unlike the European issue this 2016 referendum was about, almost nobody in actual fact cares about changing the voting system. It wasn't because they didn't like AV, but liked PR, that nobody bothered to turn out to vote in the 2011 referendum. They just didn't, and still don't care about changing the voting system.

 

I see people are mulling over the idea of compulsory voting too. Australians might like it, however compulsory voting is a spectacularly bad idea, and if somebody is unable to see straight away that the idea of the government compelling people to vote, or even compelling people to go to a polling station and abstain, in every election is just plain wrong and a massive infringement of personal liberty, then there isn't much hope for them. Thankfully the idea of compulsory voting is rightly seen as being a very cranky one, it has never gained any traction at all and has never got past first base in the UK.

[Eater Sundae]

at 72% turnout was not high at all. Only 5 points more than at the GE last year, and definitely lower than I thought it might be. And the low turnout in the referendum was a factor in the result. Had the turnout been higher, then REMAIN would probably have won. LEAVE voters were much more motivated to turn out than REMAIN voters were. It was never going to be as high as the 84% that turned out for the Scottish Referendum, but I still thought it might at least be in the late 70s. 72% was not a high turnout for this referendum at all, considering the massive amount of interest it generated. 72% is quite a low turnout really. Certainly not anything special like the turnout for the Scottish referendum was.

 

absolute turnout was quite low but some groups turned out much more to vote in this referendum than they usually do in other elections, and their turnout was high. It was the issue at hand that motivated some voters to turn out more than others, not the different voting system, and you can be sure that many people who never or almost never vote in General Elections did vote in the referendum. People in the lower DE demographic category turned out much more than in this 2016 poll than they did in the 2015 GE last year and they were the demographic most likely to vote LEAVE.

 

to try and make out that what was only a slight increase in turnout in some way means that people want a change in the voting system is nonsensical. Because when there actually was a referendum on changing the voting system in 2011, nobody wanted to know. Only 42% bothered to turn out to vote for that, the most pathetic turnout in UK history, and which showed that unlike the European issue this 2016 referendum was about, almost nobody in actual fact cares about changing the voting system. It wasn't because they didn't like AV, but liked PR, that nobody bothered to turn out to vote in the 2011 referendum. They just didn't, and still don't care about changing the voting system.

 

I see people are mulling over the idea of compulsory voting too. Australians might like it, however compulsory voting is a spectacularly bad idea, and if somebody is unable to see straight away that the idea of the government compelling people to vote, or even compelling people to go to a polling station and abstain, in every election is just plain wrong and a massive infringement of personal liberty, then there isn't much hope for them. Thankfully the idea of compulsory voting is rightly seen as being a very cranky one, it has never gained any traction at all and has never got past first base in the UK.

 

If it is the case that the exit campaign was able to motivate its supporters to vote but the remain side wasn't, then the one good thing to come out of the referendum might be that more people realise the importance of their vote.